"I just got a 12% raise at my company as part of the regular pay adjustment. It's because my director noticed someone in the same role made this much more than I do."
A real story, and a common one. Let me tell you how compensation and open salaries at Netflix work in practice:
1. Pay. Netflix pays top of the market... in cash. No equity (although you can ask for it). No bonuses. Just cash. A LOT of it.
How much? As much as competitors (Google, Meta, Amazon) etc pay and they move upwards with them when needed.
2. (Kind of) open compensation. Everyone who is at director or above at Netflix can see the compensation of *every* other Netflix employee - upwards as well. It's all cash, so they see one (big) number.
We're talking 1,000+ people. Unheard of at any other similar size company.
3. No performance rating, "just" the keeper test.
Usually, person X and person Y at the same level make different compensation, and it goes down to X had better performance reviews than Y.
Netflix doesn't do this. If you work here, you're a high performer. Else you're fired.
4. Same pay across the same roles. If person X and person Y are at the same level, same geography, do similar work and person X gets an external, higher offer, Netflix will typically counter and offer them more.
On the next compensation review, person Y gets the same raise.
And this is what happened in the above story.
Person X either got a raise or got a fresh offer when joining. A director spotted this higher salary, and made a note to move person Y - who is in their org - up to the same pay level.
A bold system that worked great for Netflix.
This system is also the reason that if you get an offer at Netflix, you *will not* be lowballed. One of the very few companies.
They offer the "top of the market rate" that everyone is already making.
They can not offer less, by design (if would raise the question of 'why?')
"How much are we talking about?"
In the US, around $250K for entry-level eng, $550K for sr eng, $620K for eng manager, $500K for product manager, $450K for data scientists. Per year, all cash. In EU: below, still a lot.
“As someone working in tech, how can I get into angel investing?”
I’ve made ~10 angel investments the past months and here’s how I went about it (thread)
1. Big tech alumni. After I quit Uber I got invited to the Uber alumni investment club. Huh? So apparently these exist
1. (Cont’d) Facebook has one, Uber has one, and a bunch of other companies (even smaller ones). They’re places you can see deals come in, and put in from very small checks.
Granted this was lucky, but seeing dozens of pitches over months was helpful in learning on the side.
2. Help founders/startups without expectations.
My first investment came well after I talked with a founder from my network, offering advice, help and feedback as it was an area I was experienced in. When they later raised, I offered to join in, and it made perfect sense.
An example of a Ponzi scheme is Techlead creating a coin that has all characteristics of a Ponzi scheme. There's no value in it beyond buying early enough, then selling it.
The person making a profit of millions? Who created this useless coin: Techlead.
I cannot shake the similarities between the Dotcom Boom and web3:
- Huge hype
- A technology most people don’t understand
- Few practical/real-world use cases
- Incredible returns in the span of months (then: IPOs. Now: tokens)
- Lots of naysayers
- Celebs/influencers involved
For the Dotcom Boom, there was the Dotcom Bust.
It’s impossible to predict if this will follow: but I do predict a crypto winter. All crypto startups need hypergrowth in users/revenue to survive & success depends on mainstream adoption.
I expect some adoption: not mainstream.
Some characteristics are similar:
Dotcom Boom companies paid a *lot* more for employees, with the expectation of becoming millionaires in 6-18 months.
Same thing is driving the hiring success for web3 companies who are burning cash like there’s no tomorrow, paying above market:
One very interesting trend I’m hearing: everyone is struggling to hire senior engineers, designers, tech leads.
Except.
Some well-funded web3 projects that are smashing it thanks to excitement, cash compensation + (token)upside.
Keen to learn more on this. (DMs also open)
A huge difference to early-stage startup hiring vs early-stage web3 hiring: equity. Startup equity is illiquid till exit (5-10 years)
web3 tokens are liquid as soon as they vest.
Solana founding employees 100x’d in a year, those joining in July already 10x’d. And they can sell!
How do some of these places hire? The opposite of big tech:
“They found me over Discord after they saw my open source contributions. Two chats with founders, no Leetcode. Offered 500% (!!) more than what I make, in USDC. I saw no reason to not accept and now I kinda like it.”
The biggest challenge the software engineering industry has today is not related to engineering.
It's related to teaching.
How can we train (very) junior engineers to get to a level where they are autonomous enough, in a reasonable timeframe? Can we do this in a remote setting?
All the while in the industry, the most experienced engineers are busy building the next framework that does an incrementally better job than before and adds another layer of complexity.
What if these people - naturally suited to teach - would be incentivized in doing so?
You don't need to look further than web development to see the contradiction.
Take React.
The API is ever-changing. Documentation is lacking. Onboarding is non-existent. Junior engineers are overwhelmed trying to learn the ever-changing React as their first frontend framework.